r APHC010423002025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH- AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO^ WRIT PETITION NO: 21938 OF 2025 Between: Palla Balia Maddilety, S/o Rathnamaiah, Aged about 41 Years, Residing at H.No. 30/4300, Bogguline, Nandyal, Nandyal District. fi ...Petitioner— AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue, Velagapudi, Amaravathi. 2. The District Collector, Kurnool district. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kurnool, Kurnool District. 4. The Tahsildar, Orvkal Mandal, Kurnool District. ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in nature of writ of mandamus to declare the action of respondents in not issuing the D form patta i.e Ac. 2.50 Cents in respect of survey no. 192-2 situated in Bramhanapalli revenue village, Orvakal mandal, Kurnool District, despite there being survey report in favour of petitioner as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of the Article 300A and Article 21 of the Constitution of India and Consequently direct the respondents to 12-05-2025, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition. 1ANOMOF2025 ^ consider my representation dt. Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated may be pleased my representation dt. 12-05-2025, pending in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court direct the respondents to consider disposal of the above Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI M.S.BANU PRASAD Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE - The Court made the following order: RAO APHC010423002025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 21938/2025 Between: 1.PALLA BALLA MADDILETY ABOUT 41 YEARS, RESIDING AT H.NO. BOGGULINE, NANDYAL, NANDYAL DISTRICT. S/0 RATHNAMAIAH, AGED 30/4300, ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VELAGAPUDI AMARAVATHI. 2.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KURNOOL DISTRICT 3.THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 4.THE TAHSILDAR, ORVKAL MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in nature of writ of mandamus to declare the action of respondents in not issuing the D form patta i.e Ac. 2.50 Cents respect of survey no. 192-2 situated in I mandai, Kurnool District, despite there being survey report in favour of petitioner as illegal arbitrary, and violative of the Article 300A and Article 21 of the Constitution of India and Consequently direct the respondents to consider m.y representation dt. 12-05-2025, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass lA NO: 1 OF 2025 in Bramhanapalli revenue village, Orvakal Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased direct the respondents to consider my representation dt. 12-05-2025, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.M.S.BANU PRASAD RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE 2 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.21938 of 2025 ORDER:- Pithily this writ petition is filed on the ground that representation dated 12.05.2025 was made to the authorities but it was not addressed. Therefore, it is urged that the respondents be directed to address the representation, as such direction would suffice in the circumstances of the case. 2. The Hon’ble Apex Court in The Government of India Venkatesh^ held as follows: vs P. ...Dispose of the representation mantra is increasingly permeating the judicial process in the High Courts and the Tribunals. Such orders may make for a quick or easy disposal of cases in overburdened adjudicatory institutions. But, they do not service to the cause of justice. The litigant is back again before the Court, as this case shows, having incurred attendant costs and suffered delays of the legal process. This would have been obviated by calling for a counter in the first instance, thereby resulting in finality to the dispute...” 3. This Court is not oblivious of the fact that a Court to authorities before directing "consideration" of a claim or representation should examine whether the claim or representation is with reference to a "live" issue or whether it is with reference to a "dead" or "stale" issue. If it is with reference to a "dead or "stale" issue or dispute, the Court/tribunal should put an end to the matter and should not direct (2019) 15 see 613 3 consideration or reconsideration. If the Court to tribunal deciding to direct "consideration" without itself examining the merits, it should make it clear that such consideration will be without prejudice to any contention relating to limitation or delay and laches. Even if the court does not expressly say so, that would be the legal position and effect. Disposal of proceedings by seemingly innocuous orders 4. directing consideration of representation though result in quick or easy disposal of cases in overburdened adjudicatory institutions but such orders do more disservice than service to the cause of justice. However, the respondents are directed that the petitioner representation dated 12.05.2025 be considered by examining thoroughly, issue orders accordingly, and communicate the decision to the petitioner. It goes without saying that the entire process will be completed within six (06) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of 5. this order. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no 6. order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any. shall stand closed. Sd/- M RAMESH BABU DEPUTY REGISTRAR Jr //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue, Velagapudi; Amaravathi. *c 2. The District Collector, Kurnool district. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kurnool, Kurnool District: 4. The Tahsildar, Orvkal Mandal, Kurnool District. 5. One CC to Sri M.S.Banu Prasad Rao, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh 7. Two CD Copies [OUTJ^ TF HIGH COURT DATED:20/08/2025 ORDER WP NO. 21938 OF 2025 0 6 SEP 2025 I 4£ESPATC«*^ jcrSi, ,70 //a:O DISPOSING OF THE W.P., WITHOUT COSTS